How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Marquis Plum Ridge Post Acute Rehab
1401 Bryant Williams Dr., Klamath Falls, OR 97601 (opens Google Maps) · Klamath County · (541) 882-6691· 77 certified beds · avg 65 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1978 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: MARQUIS COMPANIES (15 facilities, chain avg rating 4.3★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 22, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.21
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. F-0582
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. F-0677
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
View all 33 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677 |
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| May 22, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Dec 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604 |
| Dec 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Dec 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · from a complaint · F-0568 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · from a complaint · F-0578 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 16 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 7 | 0 | D |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityOregon averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.21
Oregon average: 5.42
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.86
Oregon average: 0.78
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.76
Oregon average: 4.85
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Oregon avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.21 | 5.42 | 3.95 | bottom 38% in Oregon; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.86 | 0.78 | 0.69 | top 27% in Oregon; top 23% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.76 | 4.85 | 3.50 | bottom 46% in Oregon; top 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.44 | 0.48 | 0.48 | top 40% in Oregon; top 42% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 40.9 | 47.4 | 45.8 | top 29% in Oregon; top 39% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.0 | 51.6 | 42.9 | top 12% in Oregon; top 20% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 5.02, RN 0.82, weekend 4.59.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.02 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Marquis Plum Ridge Post Acute Rehab. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fogg, Phillip | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/22/2012 |
| Marquis Companies I, INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/01/2018 |
| Fogg, Phillip | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/22/2012 |
| Fogg, Phillip | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Fogg, Steven | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Fogg, Steven | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/22/2018 |
| Fogg, Steven | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Marquis Companies I, INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Prather, Christine | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Sprando, Erin | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Sprando, Erin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
| Tone, Staci | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/22/2012 |
| Tone, Staci | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2018 |
All 13 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Marquis Companies — 15 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Marquis Springfield — Springfield, OR · overall 4/5
- Marquis Tualatin Post Acute Rehab — Tualatin, OR · overall 5/5
- Marquis Vermont Hills — Portland, OR · overall 5/5
- Marquis Wilsonville Post Acute Rehab — Wilsonville, OR · overall 5/5
- Marquis Care at Shasta — Redding, CA · overall 2/5
- Marquis Care at Centennial Hills — Las Vegas, NV · overall 4/5
- Marquis Plaza Regency Post Acute Rehab — Las Vegas, NV · overall 4/5
- Marquis Centennial Post Acute Rehab — Portland, OR · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 14 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "How do you learn about each resident's background and history, and how does that shape their care?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Oregon midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 41% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 13 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities
This is the only Medicare-certified nursing home within 40 miles. The nearest other one is Ashland Post Acute in Ashland, OR — 48 miles away in a straight line.
Straight-line distance is not travel distance. The road route is longer, and in some regions there is no road. Check the actual journey before ruling this option in or out.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 385137.